The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[zero]

Originally Posted by Supermans

I owned a manual Camaro SS for over a year and I can tell you the 5.0 feels faster and smoother.



This is accurate for the manual.
It is to be noted you cannot order the brembo's when you do order an automatic 5.0.

thanks

[VADER SS L99]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Might want to make that race with the mustang from a roll until you get a little more practice But all in all not very bad considering it is the summer and you are untuned.

Honestly I find my 5th gen a lot easier to launch than my 4th gen for some reason...

I havent been to the track yet...but I seem to get pretty good launches on the street by just holding the clutch right below grabbing point and the rpms at about 3-4k. Then I just ease down on the gas while letting out the clutch. I can usually get a pretty hard launch with some controlled wheel spin or none at all with a very slight bog. Im no expert but I would think this could get me around a 2.0 at worst...especially considering a track should hook better than the street.

whats your technique?

Oh...and I just seen your "drives" comment...that is hilarious.

Anyone want to know why the 5th gen SS doesnt run better than it does? The answer is in the post above. Can anyone pick it out? We are getting all gitty and impressed when we are able to run a 2.0 60ft? Come on people this is not acceptable. This is nothing against you UltraZ as it just confirms how horrible all our 60ft times truely are. I am even seeing drag radial cars with trailing arms that cant break a 1.7 60ft . Come on guys this is NOT acceptable and is why the GT can run away from us at the drag strip. Is it the height of the tires? the wheels? the irs? the weight? We need to figure it out otherwise we will never be competitive at the strip. I have seen base Corvettes get 1.7 60fts on street tires with a stock car and suspension for crying out loud so I bet its not the IRS.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by VADER SS L99

Anyone want to know why the 5th gen SS doesnt run better than it does? The answer is in the post above. Can anyone pick it out? We are getting all gitty and impressed when we are able to run a 2.0 60ft? Come on people this is not acceptable. This is nothing against you UltraZ as it just confirms how horrible all our 60ft times truely are. I am even seeing drag radial cars with trailing arms that cant break a 1.7 60ft . Come on guys this is NOT acceptable and is why the GT can run away from us at the drag strip. Is it the height of the tires? the wheels? the irs? the weight? We need to figure it out otherwise we will never be competitive at the strip. I have seen base Corvettes get 1.7 60fts on street tires with a stock car and suspension for crying out loud so I bet its not the IRS.

It's just heavier than the GT and older 4th gen's. That is the main reason... Lower the weight of the Camaro and its 0-60 times would improve. That is why the lighter 4th gen's still pose a threat at the track with some light mods that bring up the HP to 350 ish and they win against a stock SS.

[alrox]

Originally Posted by vernal

Yay! This is the first time I got dragged into the type of dispute that seems to happen on a lot of these threads. It must be some forum rule that rational discussion must be interrupted by invective. I'm a Chevy-loving, Ford-hating fanatic now!

People have to find something better to do with their time than argue crap in this manner.

That said, and me having nothing better to do...

(Prices before tax)
Ford GT Premium manual 33,695
White racing stripe +475=34170
Brembo's +1695=35,865
373 +395=36,260 (gotta compensate for that low-end somehow)
Comfort package (for the heated seats, Camaro has them) +595=36,855
Electronics package (truly an awesome offering by Ford, totally trumps OnStar and worth the price IMO) +2340=39,195
Rear-view camera (also awesome, beats my backup beepers) +240=39,435
Coupe accessory package 1 - I love this kit, but it is essential to compete with the looks of my (IMO) better-looking Camaro +720=40,155

I have 20" wheels and I didn't add upgraded wheels into the Mustang.

Total price I paid for my car: 34,768 2SS no RS, white stripes.

I'm sorry to respond to a troll-like post and beat this dead horse, but nobody ever yells at me here and I wanted to bust my cherry. Maybe I can get in a flame war I can talk about when Im in an old folks home. And to show the level of my Chevy bias, having owned nothing but Fords my entire life, I will post a picture of my license plate frame that will ensure that neither Chevy nor Ford guys will like me:

I'm glad you like your car, but your bias is showing. When you leave your personal bias out and option the cars comparably, you will see a much smaller price difference. No body kits on either car. A $2340 NAV system is not comparable to Onstar. The Camaro has no gear option or backup camera option. There is no factory wheel option with Brembo mustangs. The mustang has more interior color choices. Many people who buy pony cars are in the south and have little need for heated seats.

Facts:
A regular 2SS/RS is $36,345.
A regular Mustang GT Premium with Brembos, HID/security/comfort package is $36,905.

Change these to automatics, which most of the cars sold to the public will be, and the prices are:
2SS/RS automatic is $37,530.
Mustang GT Premium automatic with HID/security/comfort packages is $36,205.

The point here is Camaro has more standard features than a base Mustang but the Mustang can be optioned higher with more features than available on the Camaro. Apples to apples they are very close in price.

[GMRULZ]

Originally Posted by VADER SS L99

Anyone want to know why the 5th gen SS doesnt run better than it does? The answer is in the post above. Can anyone pick it out? We are getting all gitty and impressed when we are able to run a 2.0 60ft? Come on people this is not acceptable. This is nothing against you UltraZ as it just confirms how horrible all our 60ft times truely are. I am even seeing drag radial cars with trailing arms that cant break a 1.7 60ft . Come on guys this is NOT acceptable and is why the GT can run away from us at the drag strip. Is it the height of the tires? the wheels? the irs? the weight? We need to figure it out otherwise we will never be competitive at the strip. I have seen base Corvettes get 1.7 60fts on street tires with a stock car and suspension for crying out loud so I bet its not the IRS.

I pulled a 1.84 on stock Pzero`s, you have to have a tune though to remove the Torque Management. Stock tune GM has so much torque management there is no way you will ever pull a decent 60 foot. Case in point I went to the track w/ just headers and x-pipe no tune no intake, dead hooked and could not get better than a 2.09 60 foot. I ran my times in the sig, w/ a tune(no torque management and firmed tranny tune) I only had the ARH 1 7/8 headers xpipe w/ cats and a ADM Race intake plus that tune. Car ran pretty good for only having 364rwhp.

So the answer is get the torque management removed and you will pull a decent 60 foot, well you Mn6 guys will have to learn to slip the clutch properly but otherwise thats whats holdingthese cars back in the 60 foot dept. I don`t think the stangs TM is as invasive as the Camaro`s. Regardless at the same rwhp numbers the Camaro will lose all things being equal do to its additional weight over the stang.

Thats why we have to stay 25-30rwhp ahead of them to make up for the weight. So that means if they have full bolt-ons and we do , you will need a cam to stay in front. If they run nitrous you have to run a bigger shot. With a blower we should be able to run about 2lbs more than them on a stock motor and hopefully just have enough extra there as well. Of course don`t forget we have to hook it and be great drivers as well.

[Toyaholic]

Torque Management. Is that an A6 thing?

[GMRULZ]

Originally Posted by Toyaholic

Torque Management. Is that an A6 thing?

Its very invasive in the auto`s, but is also present in the manual`s as well from my understanding. I don`t have the mn6 though so perhaps one of those guys should chime in.

[Enator]

I really don’t get it. Why on Mustang I have to pay for Dual-zone electronic automatic temperature control??? I mean $2,340 to Electronics package which has Dual-zone electronic automatic temperature control! And I don’t need Navigation system. What is wrong with Ford? Why can’t just like Camaro put it on standard equipment?

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Enator

I really don’t get it. Why on Mustang I have to pay for Dual-zone electronic automatic temperature control??? I mean $2,340 to Electronics package which has Dual-zone electronic automatic temperature control! And I don’t need Navigation system. What is wrong with Ford? Why can’t just like Camaro put it on standard equipment?

Huh?

[Enator]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Huh?

Yep

[meanmike]

Originally Posted by Enator

Yep

Electronic It still has dual climat control.

[Toyaholic]

OUCH!$$$$$$

Wish i could have got the electronic climate control. Have it in my truck and it's the first thing I missed when getting into the SS.

[Enator]

Originally Posted by meanmike

Electronic It still has dual climat control.

Electronic automatic temperature control what I am looking for. My car is 10 years old and it has standard Dual-zone electronic automatic temperature control.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Enator

Yep

Yeah, I know that's an option...I said "huh" because I didn't understand what point you were trying to make....